[texhax] Is redefining primitives a good idea?

[Vafa Khalighi]

As an example amsmath.sty redefines \eqno and \leqno. Would not it be
better to define new macros rather than redefining existing primitives? and
how one can (if a package already redefines some primitives), restore the
original definition of the primitive? so that a primitive is really a
primitive? as in ams math package, \eqno and \lqno become primitives not
macros?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://tug.org/pipermail/texhax/attachments/20120423/c9b3bfd4/attachment.html>